Mazda CX-5 Touring
Crossover · Gasoline
vs
Toyota Corolla Cross
Crossover · Gasoline
Mazda CX-5 Touring
Car A
Mazda CX-5 Touring
The Mazda CX-5 Touring blends a 5‑star safety rating, a solid reliability score, and a generous 875 L cargo area to suit growing families at a price that’s good value in its segment. Performance and efficiency are tuned for everyday use rather than performance driving.
5 seatsCrossoverGasoline5-star safety194 hp
Toyota Corolla Cross
Car B
Toyota Corolla Cross
A sensible five-seat family car that leans on reliability and safety while keeping costs in check. Useful cargo space and efficient gasoline running make it a strong fit for growing families and daily commuting.
5 seatsCrossoverGasoline5-star safety6.5 L/100km
Why compared more reliablebetter valuecomparison picksame body typesame powertrainsame ranking profile

Usage fit

Family 85 / 72
City 51 / 55
Budget / value 64 / 71
Road trip 62 / 50
Performance 28 / 27
Cargo 56 / 34
Practical 61 / 56
Premium 24 / 23
Winter 34 / 34

Scores out of 100. Blue = Mazda CX-5 Touring · Orange = Toyota Corolla Cross

Specs side-by-side

Spec Mazda CX-5 Touring Toyota Corolla Cross
Values are representative — confirm for your market and trim.

Pros & cons

Mazda CX-5 Touring

  • 5-star safety and a reliability score of 82 support stress-free family use
  • 875 L cargo space fits family gear and road‑trip luggage
  • 194 hp with 8.6 s 0–100 km/h is confident for merging and passing
  • Price of 28,500 represents good value in its segment

Toyota Corolla Cross

  • Prioritizes reliability and safety for family duty
  • Good value in its segment around $25,000
  • Efficient for its class at 6.5 L/100 km, easing fuel costs
  • Five seats and a 487 L trunk handle school runs and weekend hauls

Verdict

Pick Mazda CX-5 Touring if…
Efficiency & everyday ease
Mazda CX-5 Touring is the choice if fuel economy and city-friendly driving are your priority.
Pick Toyota Corolla Cross if…
Reliability edge
Toyota Corolla Cross scores higher on reliability — worth considering for long-term ownership.

Related comparisons